Business ProfileforTown & Country Compounding

I've had two recent incidents in which a representative from Town and Country Pharmacy has broken standard security and privacy protocol. The first incident: I received a text on 8/8/22 from this business stating that my doctor had sent a prescription to the pharmacy. I called up the pharmacy on 8/8/22 at 2:10PM to follow-up. A male rep answered the phone. I asked him which prescription had been sent to the pharmacy. I didn't give him my name or any identifying information. After a brief hold, he returned and answered my question in detail, giving the name, number of capsules, and dosage of the drug in question.He began calling me by my first name "*****." I asked him how he knew my name. He said that he saw my last name (which he verbally identified) on the caller ID and then looked up my information. Then I gave him my credit card number and purchased the drug.In this incident the rep egregiously breached standard security and privacy protocol. Pharmacy reps should ask for the name, date of birth, and address for anyone requesting prescription information or making a drug purchase. Identifying a caller solely using caller ID is an unethical practice. My phone could have been stolen, in which case the thief would have learned my first and last name and all the details about my prescription. My phone has been stolen before, so this is more than a theoretical possibility.The second incident: I called Town and Country at 1:16PM on 8/9/22. The same rep answered the phone by saying, "Hey *****." Besides being unprofessional, this was another breach of security and privacy protocol. Had my phone been stolen, the thief would have immediately learned my first name. During this second call, the rep gave me his first name (*****) and identified himself as the person I had spoken to the day before. He wouldn't divulge his last name.To sum up, at least one employee at this pharmacy fails to follow standard security protocol. Buyer beware.

I spoke with our customer service representative named in the complaint (CSR), to understand what transpired to generate the complaint. We had a new prescription phoned in for this ******** (********) on 8/8/2022. The ******** contacted the ********************** and spoke to our CSR, who verified all of his patient information and entered that information into our pharmacy dispensing system. On 8/9/2022, the ******** called the **********************, and our CSR received the call. When CSR received the call, he identified the caller by asking for his full name and date of birth, and they started to discuss the prescription that had been called in. During this call, the ******** informed our CSR that he had another call coming in and would have to disconnect and call back. CSR told me that within 10 minutes, he saw on the caller ID that ******** was calling back from the same number he had just been speaking to him on. CSR accepted the call and said "hello ********" to continue the call with ********. ******** asked how CSR knew it was him calling back, and CSR explained since he was already in our system and was just speaking with him when he saw his name and number come up on caller ID, he wanted to pick up and continue the conversation. At this point, ******** demanded that CSR tell him his last name, and he refused.CSR told me that ******** was getting confrontational and that he did not feel comfortable giving out his last name. ******** then asked to speak to his supervisor. CSR transferred the call to our ******** Service Supervisor (Supervisor). Our Supervisor discussed with CSR why the call was being transferred to her. She then picked up the transferred call and explained that CSR was uncomfortable giving out his last name. In my opinion, I do not believe that this is a breach of security and privacy protocols. When ******** initially called, he was identified correctly by CSR, and they started discussing the prescription that was called in. ******** disconnected the line and said, " Let me call you back, " which he did. CSR identified his name and number on the caller ID and tried to continue the conversation and assist the customer in filling his prescription.

Town and Country's response to my complaint is chockablock with lies from start to finish, revealing a vile and loathsome operation. The manager who wrote this response is engaging in a cover-up, plain and simple. Bottom line, this company will violate your medical and personal privacy and then lie about it to hide their unethical business practices.I have an audio recording of a phone call I made to the merchant at 9:45AM on August 30, 2022 which proves that there was no prescription to fill on 8/9/22, as the merchant claims. I will describe this phone call shortly.First, I will break down the merchant's statement down line by line. Initially, the merchant writes, "We had a new prescription phoned in for this Customer on 8/8/22." This is true. The merchant continues, "The Customer contacted the ********************** and spoke to our ***, who verified all of his patient information and entered that information into our pharmacy dispensing system." This is a lie. ***** (the **** did not verify any of my information. He identified me by my caller ID (without initially telling me) and read my prescription information to me without verbally verifying my name or asking any identification details. (I had purchased at least one prescription from *************************** prior to this, so they had my personal identifying information.) Next the merchant writes, "On 8/9/2022, the Customer called the **********************, and our *** received the call. When *** received the call, he identified the caller by asking for his full name and date of birth, and they started to discuss the prescription that had been called in. During this call, the Customer informed our *** that he had another call coming in and would have to disconnect and call back. *** told me that within 10 minutes, he saw on the caller ID that Customer was calling back from the same number he had just been speaking to him on. *** accepted the call and said "hello Customer" to continue the call with Customer. Customer asked how *** knew it was him calling back, and *** explained since he was already in our system and was just speaking with him when he saw his name and number come up on caller ID, he wanted to pick up and continue the conversation."This passage is a compendium of lies. I will break the lies down one by one shortly.First, I'll mention that on 8/9/22, I called the pharmacy and started to tell a male rep that I had called yesterday and wanted to know who I had spoken to. Before I could finish saying this, I received an incoming call that I switched to. During this initial 8/9/22 phone call, the rep did not identify me in any way, nor did I know to whom I was speaking. The exchange was brief, as I got off the phone within about ten seconds. About 15 minutes later (to my recollection) I called the pharmacy again. ***** answered the phone by saying "Hey *****" in a breach of security and professionalism. This second 8/9/22 call was the one I mentioned in my complaint to the Board of Pharmacy. I didn't mention the first 8/9/22 phone call because it was (and is) irrelevant.Now back to the quoted passage above.1. The merchant writes, "When *** received the call, he identified the caller by asking for his full name and date of birth. . ." This is fabricated. The rep didn't ask for my name or date of birth. 2. The merchant continues, ". . .and they started to discuss the prescription that had been called in." This is false. We never discussed any prescription during this phone call. Moreover, no prescription had been called in on 8/9/22, as I will discuss later.3. The merchant continues, now discussing the second 8/9/22 phone call, "Customer asked how *** knew it was him calling back. . ." This is a triple lie. First, the merchant is implying that during the first call, the rep had identified me, which he hadn't. Second, I never asked ***** in the second call about how he knew I was calling him back. I had no idea who I was speaking to during the first call and at the beginning of the second call. I didn't know that the two reps were the same person. (In truth, I still don't know this; all I know is that I spoke with a male rep on the first call and with ***** on the second.) There was no continuity at all between the first and second calls. I had gotten off the phone within ten seconds during the first call; had not identified myself or discovered whom I was speaking to; and I didn't call back for about ******************************************************** which I asked ***** how he knew my name, while changing the question itself to "how *** knew it was him calling back." I had asked ***** on 8/8/22 how he knew my name (as described above.) The merchant has twisted the question and moved it to 8/9/22.4. The merchant continues, ". . .and *** explained since he was already in our system. . ." This is a lie. ***** didn't tell me anything about my being in the system during this phone call.5. The merchant continues, ". . .and was just speaking with him when he saw his name and number come up on caller ID. . ." Another lie. ***** didn't say anything about having just spoken to me or seeing my name and number on the caller ID. Here the merchant is transposing what ***** had said on 8/8 about seeing my last name on the caller ID to this conversation on 8/9, while changing the details.6. The merchant continues, ". . .he wanted to pick up and continue the conversation." ***** did not say anything like this. And as stated previously, I got off the phone within ten seconds on my first 8/9 phone call, before I had said much of anything. There had been no "conversation" during the first 8.9.22 phone call.So here we have six lies in a space of six sentences. There is more to come.The merchant writes, "At this point, ******** demanded that *** tell him his last name, and he refused. *** told me that ******** was getting confrontational and that he did not feel comfortable giving out his last name." This is a misrepresentation of what occurred. What happened was this: After ***** identified himself as the representative whom I had called on 8/8/22, I asked him his name. He said, "*****." Then I asked him his last name. I didn't "demand" his last name as ***** expressed; I merely asked him. The merchant said that I was getting "confrontational." This is untrue. After I asked ***** his last name, he asked, "Why do you want to know my last name?" I said, "All I need is your last name." I said no more to him about his last name. He refused to divulge it, and I asked to speak to his supervisor. While I persisted mildly with *****, I was not remotely aggressive. I didn't raise my voice and I spoke calmly and politely. I only spoke one additional sentence to ***** after he initially balked at giving me his last name. None of this adds up to "confrontational."It is ironic that ***** felt uncomfortable about me asking his last name, given the cavalier manner in which he handles the customer's personal and medical information. He had at this point breached my privacy twice--probably breaking HIPPA law on 8/8/22-- and expressed no qualms about it. But he found it unacceptable that I asked him his last name.The merchant then writes, "In my opinion, I do not believe that this is a breach of security and privacy protocols." What he fails to mention is that he had to produce numerous fabrications to make *****' behavior look acceptable. And there are more to come.The manager continues, "When Customer initially called, he was identified correctly by ***, and they started discussing the prescription that was called in. Customer disconnected the line and said, " Let me call you back, " which he did. *** identified his name and number on the caller ID and tried to continue the conversation and assist the customer in filling his prescription."Here we have another flurry of fabrications that I will describe in order.1. The manager writes, "When Customer initially called, he was identified correctly by ***. . ." The merchant is referring to my first phone call to the merchant on 8/9/22. He is lying; the *** did not identify me in any way, as I have described previously.2. The manager continues, ". . .and they started discussing the prescription that was called in." This is nonsense. I did not discuss any prescription on 8/9/22. I discussed and paid for my prescription on 8/8/22, not 8/9/22--my credit card record demonstrates this. The manager appears to be indicating that a prescription had been called in by my doctor on 8/9/22. This is false; the phone call from the doctor arrived on 8/8/22. I spoke to ******, a customer service rep for **********************, at ****** on August 30, 2022 (I recorded the phone call). She verified that the pharmacy did not receive a prescription from any of my doctors on 8/9/22.3. The manager continues, "*** identified his name and number on the caller ID and tried to continue the conversation. . ." Another fabrication. As discussed earlier, there was no conversation to continue. On the first phone call, I hung up within 10 seconds. I didn't identify myself, nor did ***** identify himself. 4. The manager continues, ". . . and assist the customer in filling his prescription." The manager is lying again. What prescription? There was no prescription to fill. I have proven the manager's statement to be false. (See statement above concerning my conversation with ****** from the pharmacy at 9:45AM on August 30, 2022.) No prescription had been called in on 8.9.22. In fact, no prescription would be called in until August 11, 2022, as per ******. These statements are facts.The phone conversation with ****** disproves all of the merchant's claims that ***** and I discussed on August 9 a new prescription that had been called in, as this call never occurred. A review of the manager's statements reveals that all of his references to a discussion about a prescription are referring to a new prescription that had yet to be filled. No such prescription existed on August 9, 2022. Therefore the manager has been caught in a web of lies.